It seems pretty clear that over time, the bulk of video will be unicast,
in order to meet on-demand needs. There will always be a few items that
folks really want to watch live, and thus where multicast may add value.
But making multicast the design driver for home networking
archtiecture seems backwards to me.
Yours,
Joel
On 2/20/15 1:22 PM, Dave Taht wrote:
On Fri, Feb 20, 2015 at 10:10 AM, Mikael Abrahamsson <[email protected]> wrote:
On Fri, 20 Feb 2015, Toerless Eckert wrote:
So foremost, it would be good to understand if there really is home L2
equipment that MUST see MLD to operate correctly. Otherwise i'd happily
ignore the problem and say there is enough bandwidth to just NOT DO snooping
but have multicast be flooded in the L2 segments.
I know of ATA (VoIP) devices with 10/half uplinks that fall over HARD when
they receive two simultaneous IPTV streams when doing channel switching.
So it's not only about bandwidth, but about how much traffic these kinds of
devices are designed to receive.
Also, remember that we're going to 4k IPTV streams that might be in the 20
megabit/s range, and we might be doing multiples of them. All devices on the
subnet will receive this if there is no MLD/PIM snooping precent.
Is there a formal definition of IPTV? as used here, it seems to imply multicast.
Frankly, until now, I was expecting the world to go to a HAS model for content,
especially big content.
--
Mikael Abrahamsson email: [email protected]
_______________________________________________
homenet mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet
_______________________________________________
homenet mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet
